Pages

Welcome to London Civic Watch

"Ever wonder if City Council is as contentious and chaotic as it is sometimes portrayed? Here you can get a progressive perspective on some of the issues from someone who spent four years in the trenches. Totally unbiased, though!Feel free to comment but keep it respectful, just like they do at council."

Monday, October 14, 2013

Unease about FinCore

“There is unease in my heart of hearts about this proposal
and how it all came about.”

So spoke Nancy Branscombe at a council meeting on June 25,
2013 as she and her fellow councillors considered the application by FinCore to
develop a parcel of land at the corner of Wellington Road and South Street in
the community known as SoHo.

It was the finale to a year and a half of proclamations and
posturing, starting with the mayor's introduction at the Chamber of Commerce's
mayor's breakfast of Loredana Onesan and her ambitious proposal to create a
$200 million—no, make that $300 million—anti-aging complex in a neighbourhood
that has seen its share of troubles but which had been the subject of a major
city revitalization plan. The project would be a gateway development, it would
create jobs, it would bring in taxes, it would be the signature project that
shows the world that the private sector believes in London.

It was a lot to expect of a one and a half acre property,
especially one that wasn't zoned for the purposesbeing suggested by the proponent. She needed
an official plan amendment and a zoning change. She also needed the land. As it
turned out, some of the land she was making plans for didn't belong to her, nor
did she have an option on it. Some belonged to a private owner who wanted to
keep it, some to the City of London, and some to the Upper Thames River
Conservation Authority (UTRCA).

Those impediments seemed to the members of the Investment and
Economic Committee (IEPC) examining the proposal a few months later to be
minor. They could fast-track it, make it happen by September of 2012. They
wanted to go, go, go.

Not so fast, staff reminded them. There was a process to be
followed. The City couldn't just make a land deal, it would have to first find
out if the land was needed by any of its departments. Should it be declared
surplus, it would have to go to the highest bidder. All of this takes time.

The lack ownership of the land would not impede the official
plan amendment or zoning change, it was learned. That was a surprise to
planning staff as well as a lot of property owners. Staff couldn't recall a
similar situation but apparently anybody may apply to rezone anyone else's land
without the owner's permission!

In any case, Onesan was behaving as if it was a done deal,
telling prospective investors that shovels would be in the ground that same
summer. On the FinCore website, the SoHo Wellington Centre is described as starting
in Spring 2012 when, in fact, an actual application wasn't submitted until
later that fall. But those are details.

Still, potential investors should have been asking a few
questions. How could someone who had not yet finished one small retirement
residence project in Lucan, a residence which would go up for sale for $15M almost
as soon as it was completed, finance a $300M project in SoHo? Where would the
money come from? In addition to her time at Western University as a graduate
French literature student and then a lecturer, Onesan's claim to business and
development acumen came from a stint at London Life and from buying and
flipping a few houses.

And there were questions about her relationship to Joe
Fontana, as well. After all, they were more than casual acquaintances. Fontana,
then chair of the board of directors of Trinity Global Support Foundation, had
invited Onesan to sit on the board of that charity, the one managed by his son.
When the charity's activities came under scrutiny from the media and the Canada
Revenue Agency, Onesan wisely stepped down, citing her pregnancy as a hindrance
to her continuance on the board. Later, Fontana himself relinquished the chair
position although he continued to serve on the board.

But soon we learned that the CRA had yanked Trinity's
charitable status. Apparently the tax receipts issued were significantly more
generous than the donors who received them. And the board had been rewarding
its directors rather well too. Fontana, in particular, had been doing “consulting
work” for the charity and another director was rewarded for negotiating a deal with a
friendly private investment firm owned by the mayor's old buddy, Vince Ciccone, who subsequently got in trouble with the Ontario Securities commission and
went bankrupt.

Although the CRA's investigation dealt with the time prior to
Onesan's appointment, the tax receipts continued to balloon. By the end of
2011, they had reached $153M and counting, making Trinity Global far and away
the wealthiest “charity” in the country. Onesan was appointed in November 2011.
Given that the CRA had found that $8M had been diverted to the board of
directors and their interests, it is hard not to suspect that the relationship
between Fontana and Onesan may have been a pecuniary one as contemplated by the Municipal
Conflict of Interest Act.

And yet, the mayor was happily promoting the FinCore project
and voting on it at committee and council meetings.

At the same time that FinCore was making eyes at Soho, it
also applied to the Thames Centre municipality to put in a retirement
residence, ostensibly the same as the one in Lucan which was up for sale, on a
vacant lot in Dorchester. That council jumped at the possibility and made
arrangements to spend about $220K for service upgrades for the lot. The source
of funding for this endeavour would be, via an agreement with FinCore, the
taxes that the municipality would receive once the retirement residence was up
and running. In the meantime, the property owner would provide a letter of
credit in the amount of $200K until the requests for the building permits came
in from FinCore.

Another application for a nursing home in Grand Bend was
turned away for lack of servicing. There was much hand-wringing and lamentation
by the Lambton Shores mayor and some local publications over the opportunity
and jobs lost. Council should have found a way to please the developer and make
it happen, they believed.

All of this was happening shortly after Onesan joined the
Trinity board. It would take a few months for the connection to make its way
into the media.

But the Investment and Economic Prosperity Committee
continued to regard the SoHo proposal as its private sector saviour, blinded by
the visions of shovels and highrises and jobs. The Planning and Environment
Committee (PEC) to which the application, when it eventually arrived, was
referred did likewise. After all, that committee, like all the others, had been
stacked in favour of the Fontana 8. Despite the unusual circumstances of the
application, they continued to have faith.

And so, on June 25th, the FinCore application
moved forward with little discussion and little opposition.

And why not? On paper, it looked like an exciting proposal: a
wellness centre, some high end highrise condos, underground parking, lovely
landscaping, elegant design.

FinCore had not skimped on endorsers, either. Former Liberal
MPP Khalil Ramal's constituency

Onesan and Patton at Planning Committee

assistant, Julie Misener, had been hired to
make the presentation, and Onesan had retained
as her agent Alan Patton, perhaps the most powerful “backroom boy” in the local Liberal
Party, a generous donor to some councillors and a frequent and formidable
opponent of the city at the Ontario Municipal Board. He urged the Planning
Committee, the majority of whom are active in the Liberal Party, to create
separate development agreements and zoning amendments for the land on which
FinCore had an option, and those it did not. That way, it could move ahead
until the pesky matter of land ownership could be resolved.

Only a few councillors asked questions before voting in
favour of the staff report which, with a couple of holding provisions, recommended
moving ahead and granting the amendments. Harold Usher wanted to know if there
would be a boardwalk along the river; Judy Bryant wanted to ensure continuing
public access to the river.

But Joni Baechler was not so agreeable to what was happening.
She chairs the UTRCA whose land was being re-zoned without its permission. She
could not support such an action. She knew that others felt the same way.

Certainly Nancy Branscombe was uneasy about what was transpiring.
Re-zoning someone's land without their permission?? But there didn't seem to be
any prohibition against that. She would reluctantly support the staff
recommendation.

Still, her gut told her that this was never likely to happen.
She had been a real estate agent and her experience told her that this was an
“upzone and sell”. Her reservations reflected the concern of many in the SoHo
community, including those who would love to see the development go forward.

Then, last week, an announcement that is not too reassuring.
Ownership of the sole FinCore retirement home, the Oasis in Lucan, has been
transferred to Palladian because FinCore was in financial difficulty, this in
spite of the fact that less than a year ago it had fired its employees and
replaced them with contract workers.

And while the FinCore website still promises that the
development in Dorchester is underway, a drive-by yesterday revealed only a
vacant lot with a billlboard and a trailer.

FinCore just continues to be full of surprises. It sounds like it is time to establish the green space Fincore was trying to buy up from the City and the UTRCA as a protected park. The neighbourhood deserves it. Maybe even a park memorializing the old Victoria Hospital right next door? No sense holding up that development because of FinCore's plans. Thank you as always for keeping track of this Gina.

Thanks for explaining all these twists and turns on this Fincore mess. Allan Patton is a prominent Liberal back room boy? Is he the lawyer that shoved the Resevoir Hill development down the throats of the community. Looks like he has that Liberal love for robbing the regular people to prop up the rich. Next election we should make sure that no Liberals get elected to council so we have a break from back room deals that the Liberal mayor and Bud Polhills planning committee like so much.

Poor SoHo community. The fix is in and the Mayor is going to hang you out to dry. When is that trial for Joe starting. Not soon enough.

Everything written here is pretty bang on. Onesan is a con artist running something very much like a ponzi scheme. Anyone who has invested with her should start to come to terms with the fact they will never see a penny in returns.

I can't believe I just came across this. This Loredana needs to be held accountable for how much heartbreak, financial hardship she has brought to SO many families! She is a financial planner, with a financial plan!!! She signs contracts and then just doesn't pay her bills. Just because she doesn't want to. She steels from the little guy who can't afford to fight her in court. Devastating families financially and emotionally (mine was one of them). She's looking after number 1. She's done this to many other families, contractors. I would be completely willing to work with you on a real story and find other people and their stories, so we could prevent her from robbing people blind!!!